The following is from a transcript of Monica S. Lewinsky's testimony to the grand jury on Aug. 20 as provided by the Associated Press and transcribed by the Federal Document Clearing House from documents supplied by the House Judiciary Committee. Editor's Note: Some of the language in these documents is sexually explicit.

A JUROR: About how many encounters did you have in the study? If you can recall.

MR. EMMICK: What do you mean by "encounters"?

A JUROR: Sexual encounters. I'm sorry.

A.Do you include kissing or not?

A JUROR: No kissing. According to the definition.

A.Okay. Two.

A JUROR: Okay. Thank you.

MS. IMMERGUT: And why don't you give us the dates of those.

A: The -- well, let me look. The 29th of March and

16 the 28th of February. There might have been -- I mean, in terms of the clothes and stuff, there might have been playful touches here and there, but not -- nothing that I would have considered sexual encounters.

Q: And that's not listed as an intimate encounter?

A: No. No, it's not. No, it's not.

Q: And just to clarify again, are those the two times that the President actually came to completion during the oral sex?

A: Yes.

BY MR. EMMICK: And I'm actually obliged to ask one follow up that I don't think will be too bad, but directing your attention to August 16th, did you attempt to touch the President on that day?

A: Yes.

Q: And did you actually touch him? In his groin area?

A: Over his clothes.

Q: Over his clothes. And did he say that's not -- "We can't do that" ?

A: Yes.

MR. EMMICK: Okay.

A JUROR: Did you feel any rejection the times that he wouldn't go all the way with you?

A: Yes.

A JUROR: Monica, I had one question to go back to the gifts. You had said that the President had called you initially to come get your Christmas gift, you had gone there, you had a talk, et cetera, and there was no -- you expressed concern, the President really didn't say anything. How much later in the afternoon did you get a call from Betty? It was that same day, is that correct?

A: Yes, that's correct. Let me just clarify real quickly that I had made the arrangements to go there on Sunday through Betty, just that you had said he called me.

A JUROR: So you had initiated the contact on that day?

A: He had -- he had told me on the 17th that he -- you know, he still had these Christmas gifts for me and then -- just shortly after Christmas and I called Betty and said, you know, "He said he had something for me," something like that, you know. And then she arranged it. So I just wanted to clarify.

A JUROR: And then how much of a time gap --

A: A few hours, maybe.

A JUROR: A few hours?

A: Maybe -- I think it was around 2:00 p.m. or so, around 2:00 in the afternoon, and I had gone there at 8:30 in the morning and left -- I'd say maybe four or five hours time span.

A JUROR: So what exactly happened? You went home and you packaged these gifts? Or had you already had them packaged?

A: No. I went home and I -- I think I went to New York that evening, possibly, so I was getting ready to go to New York, I think, or something.

But when Betty called, then she said, you know, "I understand you have something to give me." It was very vague. And I understood -- I mean, to me, that meant from this conversation that we had had that I should sort of -- you know, give some of the gifts.

So I put them all out on my bed and -- it's sort of been difficult to kind of explain why I put some things in and why I didn't put others in.

The things that seemed to be directly called for in the subpoena, I put in a box: the hat pin, the dress from Martha's Vineyard, some of the pictures and things, the ad to him from Valentine's Day. Not that that was directly called for, but some of the more intimate I guess personal things, except that I kept the "Leaves of Grass" book because that just -- I was worried, I didn't know if I would get the gifts back or not, ever, and so I -- that just -- that meant the most to me of anything he gave me.

A JUROR: And I believe your testimony last time was that you did not believe that Betty knew the contents of the package?

A: I don't believe so.

A JUROR: She just came and picked them up and that was it?

A: We chit-chatted for a little bit. She was on the way to see her mom in the hospital, so I got her a small plant to just take to her mom and --

BY MS. IMMERGUT: Did she seem at all confused when you handed over the box?

A: No.

Q: Did she ask you what was in it?

A: No. Not that I remember. I don't believe so.

MS. IMMERGUT: Thank you.

A JUROR: And just to back up for a second on your conversation with the President that you already discussed a little bit where you said you were concerned about the subpoena and some of the items that it called for such as the hat pin, which indeed the President had given you, you testified previously, I believe, that the President said he was concerned about that also when he saw the hat pin. Is that correct?

A: I don't know that he saw -- I don't know that he saw the hat pin on the -- I don't know that he saw the subpoena, so -- I know that the hat pin was a concern to him.

A JUROR: Okay. Do you remember what he said in response when you said you were concerned about the things called for in the subpoena?

A: I think he said something like "That concerned me, too."

A JUROR: Okay.

A: So I don't know if he saw it or someone you know, I don't know he learned that.

A JUROR: Okay.But.he appeared to have some prior knowledge of ...

A: I think so. I think so.

A JUROR: I have another question about that conversation on the 28th. You had already discussed with him earlier the subpoena and the fact that all of your gifts from him were under subpoena and then ...

A: We hadn't discussed that. I wasn't -- I hadn't -- the 28th was the first time that I saw him or spoke to him since I had been subpoenaed. When he called me on the 17th, I wasn't yet subpoenaed.

A JUROR: Okay. Okay. So that conversation took place on the 28th?

A: Correct. The only conversation about 15 gifts and the subpoena, really -- yes.

A JUROR: And on that same day, he gave you Christmas gifts.

A: Yes.

A JUROR: What was your thinking at that time about that? Did that concern you or ...

A: No.

A JUROR: No?

A: I was ...

A JUROR: Did you -- what did you plan to do with those gifts? Did it cross your mind that some -- that you should maybe give some of them to your attorney as responsive to the subpoena or ...

A: No.

A JUROR: No?

MR. EMMICK: I have a quick clarifying question because you said that the only conversation you had with him about gifts after the subpoena was on the 28th. You also had a conversation with him on the 5th that related to the later gift of the book, if I remember it right.

A: Right. I meant my gifts that he gave to me.

MR. EMMICK: Right. Right. Right. I just wanted to clarify that.

A: Okay. Sure.

Q: Other questions?

A JUROR: Going back to your conversation with Linda Tripp ...

MR. EMMICK: Which one?

A: Yes. Which tape are you referring to?

A JUROR: No, I'm just going to be general.

MR. EMMICK: Okay.

A JUROR: If you had to put it, like percentage-wise, what you told her as being truthful and not truthful, what percentage will be not truthful?

THE WITNESS: I would say before the subpoena, before I found out she had been subpoenaed, so for argument's sake maybe saying before December of `97, I'd say 95 percent accurate. There were some things that I didn't tell her, but I usually pretty much told her everything.

A JUROR: You started talking to her when? In `95 or `96?

A: I first told her -- when I first told her about the relationship or when I started talking to her as a person?

A JUROR: The relationship.

A: The relationship, I told her in November of `96. After the election.

A JUROR: Okay. So from November '96 to December `97 --

A: Pretty truthful.

A JUROR: And then after '97?

A: Oh --

MR. EMMICK: Could I ask just one clarifying matter about that answer? Because you had said that it was 95 percent accurate and then you also said because sometimes I didn't tell her everything. And I just want to make sure we're being clear on whether you're talking about being complete or being accurate.

In other words, are you not telling her things or are you saying things to her that are inaccurate, sort of in that 5 percent, if you will?

A: Well, I don't remember the exact situations or the times that I didn't tell her something, if she had asked me about it, I would have been inaccurate about what I said.

Q: All right. I see.

A: So --

Q: So there's kind of a blending of those two concepts.

A: Correct.

MS. IMMERGUT: And, again, to clarify, did you ever lie about
your sexual relationship with the President?

A: No.

MR. EMMICK: I'm sorry. I interrupted. I didn't mean to.

A JUROR: So after `97, then --

A: After December `97, I don't even know how to -- how to put a percentage to that.

A JUROR: Any truth at all after `97?

A: Yes. There were some truths in December of `97. There certainly were some true statements, but there were a lot of untrue statements. Probably the untrue statements stick out in my mind more because they caused so much trouble.

A JUROR: Which ones stick out in your mind as having been untruthful?

A: Stuff about my mom. Just -- a lot of different things about my mom. That I had -- that I told Mr. Jordan I wouldn't sign the affidavit until I got a job. That was definitely a lie, based on something Linda had made me promise her on January 9th. Some of the other things --

A JUROR: Did you tell Linda Tripp at any time that you had heard or understood that people don't go to jail for perjury in a civil case?

A: Yes, I believe I think I said that.

A JUROR: Did anybody tell you that?

A: Well, hmm.

A JUROR: Do you want to talk to -- I know there's -- is there an attorney issue there?

A: There's an attorney issue.

A JUROR: I see.

MR. EMMICK: Do you want to take a break and talk about the attorney issue? Because I think that may be a way to figure out if we can answer that question any more fully.

A: Do you want me to go talk to my attorney?

MR. EMMICK: Well, I just think it might be -- I think your attorney would like it if he were to talk to you.

A: Okay.

Q: That's the way to answer it.

A: Okay. So just to be clear, you're ...

A JUROR: Well, maybe I can help. Just -- if I could confine it to did anyone other than your attorney ever suggest to you that perjury in a civil case would not be prosecuted?

A: Uh.

MS. IMERGUT. If you need to talk to your attorney, go ahead.

A JUROR: I just thought -- did anyone other than your attorney tell you that?

A: No.

MR. EMMICK: I think it still would be advisable to have a more complete answer, to at least let them talk.

A: Okay.

Q: Yes.

A: Excuse me.

(The witness was excused to confer with counsel.)

MR., EMICK. Do we have a quorum?

FOREPERSON: Yes, we do.

MR. EMMICK: And are there any unauthorized persons present?

FOREPERSON: Not a one.

MR. EMMICK: All right.

A: And I'm still under oath.

FOREPERSON: Yes, you are.

MS. IMERGUT. And just to clarify a couple of things that were right before the break, when you sort of asserted a privilege or had some questions about whether there was a privilege, I did want to ask you just to clarify that with respect to the statement about your lawyer having -- or somebody telling you whether or not you can be charged with perjury in a civil case, just to be clear, did Mr. Jordan ever tell you that?

A: No.

Q: Did Mr. Carter ever tell you that?

A: No.

Q: And otherwise, I think the question was, was it another attorney and I believe that you would like to assert is the attorney-client privilege.

A JUROR: No, I think I excluded attorneys from my question.

A: Okay. You know, can I just address -- I think sort of the one of the questions that

you had asked me before and I just about ...

A JUROR: Myself?

A: Yes. That you had asked me about the relationship and being untruthful and things like that. And I just -- this is something that's sort of been on my mind since this whole thing started. I have never -- I don't -- I certainly believe I have ever told a lie to hurt anybody, that I sort of -- some of the ways in which I grew up, it was -- there were secrets and inherent in a secret is a lie and so I just, you know, I just thought I'd tell you that.

A JUROR: Okay.

MR. EMICK: Other questions?

A JUROR.Ms. Lewinsky, we're going to try, because we feel that we have been jumping around and you've done a very good job of sort of jumping from topic to topic, we're going to try to bunch our questions together around a few topics and our forelady is going to try to play traffic cop.

A JUROR: A little bit. No, you go ahead. This is your record. But I'll play traffic cop just a little.

A JUROR: Ms. Lewinsky, before you go into that, I just remember you saying something with Linda Tripp, you know, what was not the truth, okay? And I just remembered, was one of the things that you told her, that you gave your mother the blue dress, one of the untruths or was that true?

A: I don't know if I ever told Linda I gave my mom the blue dress. One of the things I did say was that I gave everything to my mom, so that probably included that and that was not true. I didn't give the evidence to my mom. My mom never hid the dress. She didn't know it was in New York.

A JUROR: Okay.

A: So she didn't know anything about it.

A JUROR: I've got one of those questions that goes along with what she just said.

A JUROR: Okay. Fine. That's the idea. The topic.

A JUROR: How much did your mom really know?

THE WITNESS: She knew -- she knew that I was having a relationship with the President. She knew that -- she knew that I was certainly emotional about it and that it made me miserable a lot and that sometimes I was elated and sometimes I was miserable, but I didn't -- you know, I -- I might have said something to her like, "We fooled around," but I -- not -- she didn't know as much as I led Linda to believe she knew. Is that --